DPReview.com is closing April 10th - Find out more

Canon lenses are unbeatable

Started Jul 26, 2020 | Discussions thread
OP nonproshooterdad Senior Member • Posts: 1,104
Re: Canon lenses are unbeatable

nnowak wrote:

nonproshooterdad wrote:

I sold my Sony 70-200/4, after compared my Canon 70-200/4L IS mark I. Canon obviously wins at 200mm. I used my M11-22 to replace my Zeiss 16-35/4 lens because the Sony lens gave me blurry corners on my A7R iii when handholding. I was looking at a pancake lens for FE mount. The only option is 35/2.8 Sony or Samyang, but no, M22 is equivalent and more compact.

Later on I compared the Sony 24-105/4G and the Canon 24-105/4L mark I, Canon wins at 70mm, ties at shorter focal lengths, Sony only wins at 105mm. And the Sony price is more than double of Canon. Sony sensor is better, but you need lenses. I then realized it is more in lenses when you choose a system. 24-105/4G is never my favorite, it feels front heavy. So it's gone. I now have Tamron 18-400 instead. 24-105/4 was for the local trips. Tamron is more flexible for that.

Let me get this straight.... You are pixel peeping the Sony FE 24-105mm vs the Canon EF 24-105mm, and you determine the Sony inferior. So, you are replacing the Sony FE 24-105mm with a Tamron superzoom 18-400mm. A lens that ends up about 40mm longer and 200g heavier than the Sony FE lens you found front heavy.

You can always find something in the text if you want to. Yes, that's what I meant. I didn't really like the Sony 24-105, and those are the reasons I didn't like it. That comparison finally lead to the decision to get rid of it. 400mm is good for geese in fly and 105mm is not. I can stand with the front heavy if it works for me.

Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow